Personally, I think of the main Victoire as being Victoire Bertrand. A lot of that is because I think of Victoire Weasley as being confident, and in control, and far more of an ode to lesser gods than a song of battered angels.

Before I start to get into the real review, I have a quick disclaimer. I am a bad little English major in that I am very picky about where I like ambiguity and unclear non-linear organization. That's not to say I never like it, but it often irritates and frustrates me more than anything. This piece did not leave me feeling irritated or frustrated, but I do want you do know that this style often doesn't work for me, just in case I say something that makes you think, "She really missed the boat."

Okay! So, disclaimer aside, how was the flow and idea?

Well, I love the idea of Victoire/Victoire (though I did briefly wonder if she had a clone or something, and whether getting involved with yourself didn't count for incest), and I think I'd have loved it a lot less if you'd executed it in a different way. It's not the plot as a whole that's unique and compelling, it's the way you expressed it - if you'd gone about it in a more linear, descriptive, conventional fashion, it would have been a well-written story, but nothing different. (I assume. Maybe you would have done something else crazy to it, I don't know!) This was unique, and on the whole, I enjoyed it. The flow was definitely choppy and disjointed, but, again, I think it kind of had to be, and it worked for me.

That said, there were definitely a few points where I had my usual reaction to the organization method - most notably when I saw the second "ii." I'm not sure if that was intentional or accidental, but both the 2nd section and the 9th section (if my count is right, and I'm not just losing my mind) are labeled ii., and after I saw that I spent half of the piece trying to figure out if you were trying to depict them both by reusing roman numerals (which thankfully, you weren't).

I'm not sure what else to say about it (which makes me feel like an awful reviewer). I liked it, and I thought it was a beautifully executed idea. :)

Author's Response: Hi there! Thanks so much for reviewing! ^_^

Ahaha, love the whole "far more of an ode to lesser gods" bit you put in there. It's just teasing enough for my taste. XD

I'm glad it didn't irritate or frustrate you! I won't lie - I know it might've irritated others, but sometimes I think that irritating people was just part of its journey.

And haha, I don't think the falling in love with yourself idea would've been incest, but it's an interesting thought! And I do think that the style as you mentioned is the "something crazy" that made this story different. I think you're right; without the style, this story could've flopped into a generic subgenre.

The second ii is intentional. A few other reviewers mentioned it, but it's the only section that repeats because both events occur in a very similar timeframe - in my mind, they're really only a few weeks apart and had the same tone, so it wasn't drastic enough to warrant a separate number. One described their process of falling in love and the other of their wedding. So, yeah, I did reuse the roman numeral, but just that one time!

No, I totally understand what you mean! I'm really glad you liked it! Thanks so much for reading and reviewing! ^_^